What do you think?
Rate this book
Complexity Theory and the Social Sciences: An Introduction
Introduces students to the central ideas which surround the chaos/complexity theories. It discusses key concepts before using them as a way of investigating the nature of social research.
216 pages, Paperback
First published January 10, 1998
4 people are currently reading
78 people want to read
About the author
David S. Byrne
13 books1 followerAttended University of Newcastle and LSE before teaching at Durham 1970-74. Research Director North Tyneside Community Development Project 1974-77. Reader in Sociology Ulster Polytechnic 1977-80. Since at University of Durham. National positions have included Treasurer Social Policy Association, Treasurer Joint Universities' Council for Social and Public Administration, Chief Examiner for Sociology studentships ESRC. Editor of Sociology. Member ESRC College of Assessors, Member ESRC Research Training Board, Academician - Academy of Learned Societies for the Social Sciences
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
February 11, 2014
Pleh. I cannot recommend this book unless you're a Marxist or utopian central planner.
I bought it looking for insight into how complexity theory informs social sciences. In particular, I was looking for information on how modern understanding of complexity has impacted macroeconomics. There is no such information in this book.
The author makes it clear up front that he's quite left-leaning, and that perhaps accounts for his failure to address economic concerns (other than equality, which is his overriding concern). He makes a few token attempts to inject complexity into economic theory, but virtually the entirety of his economic discussion is concerned with blaming capitalism for the world's problems. Interestingly, in the case studies in which he argues this point, he doesn't involve complexity theory at all; he simply assumes that the reader will agree with him about his "self-evident" conclusions. Byrne does use a lot of erudite language and terminology, in keeping with the leftist conceit that liberalism and intellectualism are synonymous; and he does cite a lot of work by others, but at times it seems as though he cites his own work at least as frequently (in keeping with the general leftist tendency toward smugness, I suppose).
Worst for me was his underhanded jibes at F. A. Hayek, coupled with his steadfast refusal to acknowledge that Hayek was the father of complexity theory (what was in his day termed "emergent order.") He also undermines his own arguments by asserting that economic and social planning can be rendered immune from the kinds of bifurcations that make them impossible to carry out in reality.
The first two chapters do provide a decent overview of complexity, but after that, if you want information without propaganda, I recommend you skip ahead to the glossary.
I bought it looking for insight into how complexity theory informs social sciences. In particular, I was looking for information on how modern understanding of complexity has impacted macroeconomics. There is no such information in this book.
The author makes it clear up front that he's quite left-leaning, and that perhaps accounts for his failure to address economic concerns (other than equality, which is his overriding concern). He makes a few token attempts to inject complexity into economic theory, but virtually the entirety of his economic discussion is concerned with blaming capitalism for the world's problems. Interestingly, in the case studies in which he argues this point, he doesn't involve complexity theory at all; he simply assumes that the reader will agree with him about his "self-evident" conclusions. Byrne does use a lot of erudite language and terminology, in keeping with the leftist conceit that liberalism and intellectualism are synonymous; and he does cite a lot of work by others, but at times it seems as though he cites his own work at least as frequently (in keeping with the general leftist tendency toward smugness, I suppose).
Worst for me was his underhanded jibes at F. A. Hayek, coupled with his steadfast refusal to acknowledge that Hayek was the father of complexity theory (what was in his day termed "emergent order.") He also undermines his own arguments by asserting that economic and social planning can be rendered immune from the kinds of bifurcations that make them impossible to carry out in reality.
The first two chapters do provide a decent overview of complexity, but after that, if you want information without propaganda, I recommend you skip ahead to the glossary.
March 30, 2024
Byrne's work here isn't bad by any means - it's quite interesting and well argued, but rather that it fits a particular viewpoint and is far too dense to be an "introduction" into the topic. Too much of this flew over my head but enough stuck to make it clear that this is probably good work, just not at all what is advertised.
November 8, 2015
How to mess an interesting theory? Add utopianism to the mix!!! (Even if it's contradictory with the notion of having no clear predictions)
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews